Code of Conduct
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5
Results 121 to 150 of 150
  1. #121
    Dependent Mythrol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    1,639
    Blog Entries
    72

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    I expected to see my brother having already posted in this thread. Maybe 18 months or so back we found a cache of Z-14 Jeff Gordon bottles for sale at a local shop we go to. If I remember correctly they were like $12-15 each and all had Oakmoss as a listed note. We proceeded to buy out their stock and ended up with 2-3 bottles each.

    Needless to say I've got some experience with both the Oakmoss version and the new one and as most have said, it's not even close. That's not to say someone should go spend big bucks on the old formulation (unless of course they love it), but it is by far the better version. Plus how strong it is, one bottle probably would last most people a lifetime.

  2. #122
    Basenotes Plus
    Diddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Bayou Country
    Posts
    5,755

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by Mythrol View Post
    I expected to see my brother having already posted in this thread. Maybe 18 months or so back we found a cache of Z-14 Jeff Gordon bottles for sale at a local shop we go to. If I remember correctly they were like $12-15 each and all had Oakmoss as a listed note. We proceeded to buy out their stock and ended up with 2-3 bottles each.

    Needless to say I've got some experience with both the Oakmoss version and the new one and as most have said, it's not even close. That's not to say someone should go spend big bucks on the old formulation (unless of course they love it), but it is by far the better version. Plus how strong it is, one bottle probably would last most people a lifetime.
    If I haven't shared Halston branded/distributed formulation of Z14 with you, hit me up. It'll take you back to our childhood, smelling Uncle.

    PS. We need to go hit that little local shop soon!
    Sent from the bayou, using homing gators.

  3. #123
    Moderator
    rum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    UK / Île de chypre
    Posts
    13,029

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by rum View Post
    I've been checking out IC in the newest revamp which is currently exclusive to Harrods and TF in the UK. I also have a small decant of the original IC and a vintage bottle of Z-14.

    I haven't spent much time with them, but I can say that so far I prefer the opening of Halston Z-14, and the dry down of IC. I am obviously going to spend more time with them both before coming to some final conclusions.

    Vintage Z-14 (Jeff Gordon bottle in my case) is way better than the current Z-14 which I agree is a cinnamon bomb. Nothing unpleasant, just not a long-lasting scent and nothing like how it's prereformulated distant relative was.
    Another observation worth noting is that IC opens bitter whereas JG Z14 version is notably sweeter. If it weren’t for the underlying woods, Z14 might just be too sweet for me. I don’t think IC holds well though.
    Currently wearing: Antaeus by Chanel

  4. #124

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    This thread inspired me to seek out some vintage Z-14. Wasn't very hard to find a Jeff Gordon era gift set for $17.50 shipped on eBay.
    Looking forward to trying this one out.

  5. #125

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Oakmoss Z14 is heavier on the floral accents of lavender and gardenia. Treemoss Z14 dampens the lavender and dries out the gardenia, though both notes survive in the reformulation. The oakmoss doesn't factor into the note pyramid at all - it's just there to serve as a fixative for the bouquet in this composition. The cinnamon in each formula smells identical to me. Is the treemoss formula close to the oakmoss version? To my nose, yes. Maybe a 15% difference between them at most.

  6. #126
    Dependent Marand75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,549

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by HankHarvey View Post
    Oakmoss Z14 is heavier on the floral accents of lavender and gardenia. Treemoss Z14 dampens the lavender and dries out the gardenia, though both notes survive in the reformulation. The oakmoss doesn't factor into the note pyramid at all - it's just there to serve as a fixative for the bouquet in this composition. The cinnamon in each formula smells identical to me. Is the treemoss formula close to the oakmoss version? To my nose, yes. Maybe a 15% difference between them at most.
    But that 15% means a world of difference, imo. I had a 2016-bottle which felt so harsh and the base was, well, 'hollow' is a way to describe it. I have a 2006 cologne splash that behaves noticably different. Warmer. Sadly, I still think the cinnamon-level is too high. Like, over time, it has been made into a key player with too much emphazis on it. Has it always been so with z-14?
    Thanks.
    Non IFRA Compliant & proud of it!

  7. #127
    Dependent
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    4,155

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by Marand75 View Post
    But that 15% means a world of difference, imo. I had a 2016-bottle which felt so harsh and the base was, well, 'hollow' is a way to describe it. I have a 2006 cologne splash that behaves noticably different. Warmer. Sadly, I still think the cinnamon-level is too high. Like, over time, it has been made into a key player with too much emphazis on it. Has it always been so with z-14?
    Thanks.
    15% is a HUGE difference. Greater than most flankers. A reforumulation more than 5% different than the original is an abject failure imo.

    Besides the difference, the new crap is just terrible in general. Very much a dimestore cinnamon novelty thing.

  8. #128
    Dependent Marand75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,549

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by MonkeyBars View Post
    15% is a HUGE difference. Greater than most flankers. A reforumulation more than 5% different than the original is an abject failure imo.

    Besides the difference, the new crap is just terrible in general. Very much a dimestore cinnamon novelty thing.
    5-10% and it's a flanker LOL!

    But yeah, I don't understand the reason for such dominating cinnamon/cinnamal. Your conclusion towards that is spot on.
    Non IFRA Compliant & proud of it!

  9. #129

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by MonkeyBars View Post
    15% is a HUGE difference. Greater than most flankers. A reforumulation more than 5% different than the original is an abject failure imo.

    Besides the difference, the new crap is just terrible in general. Very much a dimestore cinnamon novelty thing.
    Meh, I guess I'm the lucky one who enjoys the fragrance without smelling an over-abundance of cinnamon, even in the latest version. 15% is a significant difference (even 10% is significant) but then the question moves to, is the difference a shift in quality or a shift in character (or both)? In my opinion it's a shift in character but not a shift in quality. YMMV

    Still smells full of lemon and cypress-laden woods with a hint of spicy musk in the base. Granted, the longevity of the latest version sucks in comparison to vintage.

  10. #130

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    BTW can anyone tell me what the biggest difference is between the newest bottle and the vintage? - as in, how the bottles look different?

  11. #131

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by HankHarvey View Post
    BTW can anyone tell me what the biggest difference is between the newest bottle and the vintage? - as in, how the bottles look different?
    unless it's one of those weird sprayer bottles with the neck, these bottles have looked the same for years. the best way to tell would be the label on the bottom of the bottle.

  12. #132

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by masonjarjar View Post
    unless it's one of those weird sprayer bottles with the neck, these bottles have looked the same for years. the best way to tell would be the label on the bottom of the bottle.
    I take it then there's no way to tell if you have the latest formula just by looking at the bottle?

  13. #133
    Dependent Marand75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,549

    Default Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by HankHarvey View Post
    I take it then there's no way to tell if you have the latest formula just by looking at the bottle?
    Not really, you'll need the batch# for precise dating if it's just the bottle. My '06 splash looks excactly like the modern sprays (rounded screwtop & collar-cap as opposed to vtg w/ just a rounded screwtop-cap & no collar). If it's a cologne splash w modern cap, it's old stock JG era formula or earlier. If it's a spray w modern cap, it could be any formula of the past 20 yrs.
    Non IFRA Compliant & proud of it!

  14. #134

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by Marand75 View Post
    Not really, you'll need the batch# for precise dating if it's just the bottle. My '06 splash looks excactly like the modern sprays (rounded screwtop & collar-cap as opposed to vtg w/ just a rounded screwtop-cap & no collar). If it's a cologne splash w modern cap, it's old stock JG era formula or earlier. If it's a spray w modern cap, it could be any formula of the past 20 yrs.
    Actually the newest formula comes in a bottle that is almost clear, as opposed to the traditionally dark brown glass of all prior vintages. Newest bottles are still brown glass, but the shade of brown has been lightened to the point where it almost doesn't look like a regular Z14 bottle. Also, the atomizers on the new bottles are slightly different, with a thicker stem. In the past the atomizer buttons were interchangeable. Not anymore.

  15. #135
    Dependent Marand75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,549

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by HankHarvey View Post
    Actually the newest formula comes in a bottle that is almost clear, as opposed to the traditionally dark brown glass of all prior vintages. Newest bottles are still brown glass, but the shade of brown has been lightened to the point where it almost doesn't look like a regular Z14 bottle. Also, the atomizers on the new bottles are slightly different, with a thicker stem. In the past the atomizer buttons were interchangeable. Not anymore.
    Ah okay, I wasn't aware. Thanks, Hank. I wonder why houses make changes like that..
    I just picked up a 2oz splash cologne of z14 from around 1990. Man, forget about current juice and JG era and everything in between.. THIS stuff is beautiful! Cinnamon is there but plays, like, 8th fiddle or so. Instead you get punched in the face with cypress leather and lemon...a LOT of it! And from there it just gets better and better. Wow.
    Non IFRA Compliant & proud of it!

  16. #136

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by Marand75 View Post
    Ah okay, I wasn't aware. Thanks, Hank. I wonder why houses make changes like that..
    I just picked up a 2oz splash cologne of z14 from around 1990. Man, forget about current juice and JG era and everything in between.. THIS stuff is beautiful! Cinnamon is there but plays, like, 8th fiddle or so. Instead you get punched in the face with cypress leather and lemon...a LOT of it! And from there it just gets better and better. Wow.
    Rule of thumb for me has been if I see a 2 oz Z14, it's definitely vintage and worth smelling. However I've smelled that vintage (presumably 90s or early 2000s), and my experience was the opposite of yours. Unbalanced cinnamon, thick, acrid citral aldehyde tenuously balanced on a bitter oakmoss and wet earth accord that resembled a wet cigar. I envy you - my vintage was a cinnamon bomb in the drydown. Wish I'd had your luck with it.

  17. #137
    Dependent Marand75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,549

    Default Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by HankHarvey View Post
    Rule of thumb for me has been if I see a 2 oz Z14, it's definitely vintage and worth smelling. However I've smelled that vintage (presumably 90s or early 2000s), and my experience was the opposite of yours. Unbalanced cinnamon, thick, acrid citral aldehyde tenuously balanced on a bitter oakmoss and wet earth accord that resembled a wet cigar. I envy you - my vintage was a cinnamon bomb in the drydown. Wish I'd had your luck with it.
    It's made between '89-'91. I'll PM you.
    Non IFRA Compliant & proud of it!

  18. #138

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Thoughts today on wearing EA Oakmoss today (vs EA Treemoss)

    EA-O: Definitely a pronounced "moss" factor vs the newer bottle. It's smoother, sweeter and more balanced. More refined.

    EA-T: More in-your-face, and for me, though it has the same longevity, the projection is actually stronger off my skin. It's almost like, not having that oakmoss makes it less blended, so the lemon and cinnamon "stick out" from the other notes.

    I really need to do an arm vs. arm to confirm.

  19. #139

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Wrong post.

  20. #140

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by masonjarjar View Post
    Thoughts today on wearing EA Oakmoss today (vs EA Treemoss)

    EA-O: Definitely a pronounced "moss" factor vs the newer bottle. It's smoother, sweeter and more balanced. More refined.

    EA-T: More in-your-face, and for me, though it has the same longevity, the projection is actually stronger off my skin. It's almost like, not having that oakmoss makes it less blended, so the lemon and cinnamon "stick out" from the other notes.

    I really need to do an arm vs. arm to confirm.
    To me the treemoss formula smells drier than the oakmoss version

  21. #141

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Another Z-14 Note..

    I do not own any of them prior to the EA takeover, but there are slight difference in bottles between the EA-Oakmoss and the EA-Treemoss versions.

    The EA-O bottle glass is definitely darker, and it has a different sprayer design. It's built such that it doesn't spray as much as the EA-T bottle.

    The nozzle sits closer to the neck on the EA-O bottle, therefore you can't press it down as far, the EA-T gives much better distribution due to the longer travel of the nozzle.

    So basically, I need to figure out how to swap the juice between the two bottles

  22. #142

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    I wore the Jeff Gordon vintage last Sunday and was underwhelmed. It honestly was pretty weak. First time I had experienced that with it.
    Currently wearing: Green Irish Tweed by Creed

  23. #143

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by ChuckW View Post
    I wore the Jeff Gordon vintage last Sunday and was underwhelmed. It honestly was pretty weak. First time I had experienced that with it.
    My JG bottle it didn't blow me away like I thought it would. The character is definitely different than the most recent version. As I said, smoother and richer, but it's nowhere near beast-mode. But it's not so different that I think the newest version is "runied" in comparison, but maybe it is compared to the original releases. Looks like I'm going to have to go back further in time to find out for myself.

  24. #144
    Dependent
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    4,155

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by masonjarjar View Post
    My JG bottle it didn't blow me away like I thought it would. The character is definitely different than the most recent version. As I said, smoother and richer, but it's nowhere near beast-mode. But it's not so different that I think the newest version is "runied" in comparison, but maybe it is compared to the original releases. Looks like I'm going to have to go back further in time to find out for myself.
    I never considered Z-14 a beast at all. It was once a classy woody-spicy masculine.

  25. #145

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by ChuckW View Post
    I wore the Jeff Gordon vintage last Sunday and was underwhelmed. It honestly was pretty weak. First time I had experienced that with it.
    Same here Chuck. Wore the Jeff Gordon version earlier today and it's basically gone in 3 hours. Never projects more than 3-4 inches or so off of my skin. Sprayer sucks as well. I also have an older bottle of Z-14 with the "French Fragrances" label, 90's version I'm guessing? Anyway, it's weak as well. But I only paid $10 shipped for it, and $17 for the Gordon version which also came with a 1oz after shave, so I can't complain. Another in the long line of "Smells great, poor performance" category of fragrances...

  26. #146

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    I was going to seek this one out but if it's as underwhelming as recent posts suggest maybe I'll pass.
    Especially if it's not so different to the latest treemoss-only version.

  27. #147
    Dependent
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    4,155

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by cpp214 View Post
    Same here Chuck. Wore the Jeff Gordon version earlier today and it's basically gone in 3 hours. Never projects more than 3-4 inches or so off of my skin. Sprayer sucks as well. I also have an older bottle of Z-14 with the "French Fragrances" label, 90's version I'm guessing? Anyway, it's weak as well. But I only paid $10 shipped for it, and $17 for the Gordon version which also came with a 1oz after shave, so I can't complain. Another in the long line of "Smells great, poor performance" category of fragrances...
    You're probably just underapplying. Remember Z-14 is an eau de cologne, and the sprayer is quite small, spitting out tiny spritzes per depress. I do 5-10 sprays.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hugh V. View Post
    I was going to seek this one out but if it's as underwhelming as recent posts suggest maybe I'll pass.
    Especially if it's not so different to the latest treemoss-only version.
    It's VERY different. Night and day. One is a brash cheap spice room spray, the other a sophisticated 70s woody cologne.

  28. #148

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by MonkeyBars View Post
    You're probably just underapplying. Remember Z-14 is an eau de cologne, and the sprayer is quite small, spitting out tiny spritzes per depress. I do 5-10 sprays.
    Thanks for the tip. Next time I will go heavier on the trigger. I like this one quite a bit, especially for the price. It's ridiculous how cheap the prices are for this stuff.

  29. #149

    Default Re: Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Just got a new bottle of z14, Is there another reformulation ? As this one doesnt contain tree or oak moss at all, its absolutly a joke it smells so bad compared to my old bottle I

  30. #150
    Dependent Marand75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    1,549

    Default Halston Z-14 (old formulation) vs (new formulation)

    Quote Originally Posted by square View Post
    Just got a new bottle of z14, Is there another reformulation ? As this one doesnt contain tree or oak moss at all, its absolutly a joke it smells so bad compared to my old bottle I
    Yeah, currents are horrible. Z-14 was pretty good up until the late '00s. I have an '06 cologne splash that's really nice, and a '91 cologne splash that is just phenomenal!
    Non IFRA Compliant & proud of it!




Similar Threads

  1. Van Cleef & Arpels Tsar: Old formulation vs. New formulation
    By Grottola in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 20th July 2019, 11:39 PM
  2. Azzaro PH (old formulation) vs Azzaro PH (new formulation)
    By jclaxton78 in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 9th June 2014, 01:05 AM
  3. formulation template
    By oliverandco in forum Fragrance DIY
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 15th February 2011, 04:02 PM
  4. Contradiction re-formulation?
    By ObsessionForMen in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 4th May 2010, 11:01 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  



Loving perfume on the Internet since 2000